Raise the Hammer

Comment 68934

I was asked to comment on the debate regarding the remediation costs of the West Harbour. But first, let me congratulate Mr. Shaker on a well written and timely article. Personally, I am concerned that the Mayor mentioned, in passing, that certain developers are seeing an opportunity to secure these lands. I have no doubt! I am also sure that they want these lands at rock bottom prices. I cannot support abandoning this community to the wishes of a few developers. The land was purchased with the intent of providing some community and sporting amenities. The City must honour our commitment!

The wide variances of the remediation costs is due to the province's rules regarding soil remediation. The City or landowner is required to file a " Record of Site Condition (RSC)", part of the EPA, Regulation 153/04. This regulation requires a Part I and II Environmental Assessment and site specific risk assessments. This simply means that any clean-up depends on the level of contamination and the lands final use. For example, if future use was to be another industry the requisite clean up would likely be less extensive and costly than if the end use was going to be residential.

In this case, the proposed clean-up for the West Harbour stadium was the least expensive with a site specific risk assessment that would mean capping the site for approx $3-5 million. In essence, the proponent would be sealing the contamination in and minimizing the potential migration of surface water through any contaminants to the ground water. The higher estimate was based on a dig and dump, where the contaminated soil would be excavated, rendered inert and dumped in a landfill, $20-$35 million.

That being said, any argument that we cannot use the West Harbour for the velodrome because the remediation would be too expensive is specious. Since, the City now owns the West Harbour lands, we are NOW responsible for the clean-up costs regardless of any Velodrome decision.